the media is complicit

When the media starts in with their “let’s demonize the victim” crap in cases of police brutality, demand they do the same with the cops. They wanna dig into Dr. David Dao’s “troubled past?” Bullshit. Why don’t they dig up and publish details about the assholes who beat Dr. Dao and dragged him off the plane? Or how about the people who called those officers to enforce their corporate will? THOSE are the motherfuckers they need to be going after.

Dr. Dao didn’t do a damn thing wrong. He bought his ticket. He took his place. Then the airline wanted to kick him off so they could give his seat to one of their employees, because they overbooked the flight. For doing nothing more than refusing to give up the seat that was rightfully his, they publicly beat him and dragged him off the plane.

Make no mistake about what happened: United demanded that Dr. Dao give up the seat he had bought and paid for, in order to fix THEIR fuck-up, and when he refused, the state jumped in to enforce the will of our corporate overlords.

That is the purpose and function of the police in America. To protect the interests of the powerful at the expense of the powerless.

And the media is right there complicit with the violence, digging up anything they can to somehow make it look like the victim deserved what they got.

Often it’s even worse, though. If Dr. Dao had been black, they’d have just shot him. They do that shit all the time. And then we have pasty-faced “journalists” (read: corporate propagandists) going on about what a bad person the victim was and how they probably deserved it, while the real criminals get to hide behind badges and bank accounts, and usually escape any real consequence other than maybe some paid time off. Hell, the cop who murdered Mike Brown got a 1.5 million dollar REWARD.

Fuck that. Tell me the names of the officers involved. Tell me every single fucking dirty thing they’ve ever done in their lives. I want to know if they ever got into a fight or got caught smoking in high school. I want to know if any of them have ever been accused of beating other victims. Go after them the way you went after their victim. Tell me about the scumbag who made the decision to call them in to begin with, to forcibly take back from a person what they had lawfully purchased–because someone at the company suddenly came down with a case of “seller’s remorse.”  THAT’S the reporting I want to hear.

And then put those officers, and the people who called them, in jail.

But that’s not gonna happen. Because this is AmeriKKKa.
Police Brutality Set Off The L.A. Riots 25 Years Ago. We've Learned Nothing Since.
The directors of "LA92" discuss the legacy of one of the most destructive riots in American history.

Go watch the video of Rodney King being beaten. Really watch it. You’ll see eight brutal minutes of an unarmed black man being kicked, clubbed, and tasered within an inch of his life by LAPD officers ― men sworn to protect and serve.

When the clandestinely shot video of King’s beating came out in 1991, it sent shockwaves throughout the entire country, sparking a conversation about racial bias and police brutality. The four police officers charged in the King beating were acquitted, and the city saw one of the most destructive riots in American history.

April 29th will mark the 25th anniversary of the LA riots, 25 years since a mirror was held up to the face of America and revealed a grotesque reflection. Anniversaries are about looking back. They are about legacy. But what is the legacy of the three days of carnage that ensued back then, sending much of Los Angeles into a deluge of violence, looting, and burning buildings?

In their new National Geographic documentary “LA92,” filmmakers T.J. Martin and Daniel Lindsay go in-depth to explore the legacy of the riots, forgoing the usual talking heads and experts and using only raw, unedited archival footage, leaving it up to the audience to make up their minds about the meaning of the riots.

There’s a moment in the documentary, one day into the deluge, where a Korean shop owner defiantly defends her store from a band of black and Latino looters.

“This is America!” She screams at the crowd. “This is America!”

The moment, is the film, and the riots themselves, in microcosm. In other words ― the riots were complicated, and messy. They weren’t just black-and-white. The underlying tensions weren’t just about the beating, but the racist justice system that allowed the cops to go free and, just a year earlier, Korean shop owner Soon Ja Du to go free in the senseless killing of Latasha Harlins.

I spoke with T.J. Martin and Dan Lindsay about what they learned about the riots in retelling this story on film ― and what America has yet to learn.

HuffPost: The film opens and closes with black-and-white footage from the Watts Riots on 1965, which juxtapose in such a stunning way with the LA Riots which took place decades later. There’s this sense of history repeating itself. Why do you think this keeps happening ― the beatings and killings of unarmed black folk, and the subsequent unrest?

Dan Lindsay: Our country has never reconciled the inherent contradictions of its founding. The people that wrote the document that said all men are created equal owned human beings. That’s just mind-blowing. As a country, we’ve never been able to reconcile that. And as long as we continue to have marginalized communities that don’t have a voice, as long as that happens, you shouldn’t be surprised if uprisings or unrest happen. It’s happened throughout all human history, throughout all of the world, from the same circumstances.

HP: The film is derived entirely from archival footage of news broadcasts, court videos, aerial footage and so on. What was the reasoning behind that, and what was the process like to organize all those hours of footage into a cohesive narrative?

T.J. Martin: We wanted to take a unique approach that would maybe inspire a unique perspective, and ultimately create a new way of thinking about these events. We didn’t want the the filter of an expert telling you what you think. It was less about deconstructing the anatomy of the events. It became much more immersive as an experience.

DL: We wanted to challenge the audience to begin thinking about these things, to have conversations, to ask the question: What do we need to do to make it so this never happens again? Because clearly we tend to have these cycles of things. We deal with it for a little bit, then everybody goes back to their lives.

HP: There are a lot of interesting moments with the media in this film, little vignettes where we see anchors right before going live, adjusting their hair and doing their makeup before launching into somber broadcasts. What do you think the role of the media was, and continues to be, in conversations about police brutality?

DL: That was a really intentional device because we had concerns that, not all of this, but a lot of this, was created by the media. The media was complicit in creating the events that led to this. We wanted to find a way to imply the idea and that was showing the getting ready. It indicates the facade of the media. It’s presentation. It’s business as usual. To us, that’s representative of America. We have this facade, this image we sell, that we don’t necessarily live up to.

HP: It’s been 25 years since the riots, and while we haven’t had anything as destructive as that happen again ― there’s a sense that it’s only a matter of time. What, to you, is the legacy of the riots?

T.J.:  I think what came out of it was for a short moment, an engaged conversation on race and class. But that same short engaged moment of conversation happened after 65 Watts. That same short engaged moment of conversation happened during the race riots in Detroit. These spurts operate as fads. It’s a symptom and also an extension of the problem. I don’t know about legacy. To me I just think of [the L.A. riots] as one chapter of an ongoing story.

HP: What’s stopping us from bringing this story to a close then?

T.J.: We haven’t figured out the tools of how to talk about this thing where it becomes a constructive conversation. The moment you bring up race and class, it becomes a debate. But it’s not about a debate. There are marginalized communities. This is real.

DL: But we’re trying to activate the audience’s own realization of these things, right? Near the end of the film, you see Bill Clinton watching Bush give his address after the riots, and you realize the riots were at least part of what made Clinton president. And then you think of today, when you hear phrases like “law and order,” the [fear-mongering], and then Trump becomes president. It’s our collective society’s reaction to things, these shifts.

HP: There are moments in this film that are difficult to watch ― the looting of businesses, especially Korean-American businesses. The beating of the white truck driver Reginald Denny. When we talk about riots and unrest, there’s always criticism about rioters destroying their own communities, or resorting to violence instead of peace. What would be your reaction to someone who saw this film and felt the black and Latino rioters weren’t justified in their acts?

T.J.: If anyone were to come with that type of argument, they are neglecting the visceral violence that happened to Rodney King. What we try to do, at the very least, is set context. King just happened to have a video. These atrocities, these abuses of power have been happening since the birth of the country. So by isolating members of a community (who were rightfully so angry) and dismissing 400 years of horrible treatment of one specific community…. that alone is an unfair analysis of the situation, period. We are not watching the same movie.

the issue isn’t of ship versus ship, it’s about representation, which has implications for the mental health and well-being of lgbt people, versus erasure. 

the power structures under which ships exist are not the same for gay and straight ships and never ever exist in a vacuum.

all media and all interpretations of media both play into and challenge power structures and elements are either complicit or transgressive, although no piece of media is entirely one or the other. 

when lgbt people ship a gay ship it is a matter that affects their core and their very lives, including their mental health. when straight people ship a straight ship it has no effect on them either way in terms of their identity. 

dismissing a gay reading or challenging it on unequal grounds has a negative impact on the lgbt people whose identities can be tied in with that ship. 

ships that rival a gay ship, or question its existence or credibility, implicitly constitute dismissal or a challenge. 

to say that criticism of ships that rival and diminish gay ships is harmful is a false equivalence. to dismiss it as “ship hate” is to posit an equal playing field.

there is no equal playing field in real life. lgbt people are at a distinct disadvantage in mental health and physical and emotional needs. don’t forget that. 


Please notice the intentionally passive language used in this headline. It’s a way of describing a shooting without assigning responsibility. Roy Oliver aimed at a car full of innocent black people, and then he pulled the trigger. He was a lot more than just “involved” in killing Jordan Edwards. He was the one who killed him. That is not in dispute. It’s even captured on video.

How the story is framed matters. Words matter.

A black person like Sandra Bland can’t vocally express displeasure at police brutality without media immediately using the active voice—with a clear subject, verb, and direct object—to describe our actions, but for some reason media uses the passive voice when the subject is an officer who murdered an innocent black person. Why do you think that is?

It’s a rhetorical question, I know why.

America is in for a horrible time.

Trump voters have no idea of what to expect. Trump voters have no idea what Trump owns. No idea how much, and to who, Trump owes billions in loans. Trump voters never demanded to see tax returns. Trump voters are indifferent about Russian control over Trump. We have a Republican Party complicit with Trump’s treason and hostility toward media/critics.

This does not end well.

Vintage Original Flyer for the August 29, 1970 Chicano Moratorium.

On August 29th, 1970, over 20,000 people marched in East Los Angeles to protest against the Vietnam War and raise awareness of the disproportionate number of its Mexican American casualties.  At the peak of the demonstration, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department and the Los Angeles Police Department attacked peaceful protestors who were congregated in Laguna Park.  Moments later, a sheriff’s deputy shot and killed Mexican American journalist Ruben Salazar.  Three other individuals were also murdered by law enforcement that day.  The details of Salazar’s death are sketchy, but have since been determined by authorities as an “accident.”

The PBS documentary, RUBEN SALAZAR: MAN IN THE MIDDLE, provides an excellent background history on Salazar, and illuminates the political convictions of an individual who, even in the title of the film, is often problematically described as a moderate.  MAN IN THE MIDDLE has also been criticized for slandering Chicano activists and maintaining the murky details of Salazar’s very apparent assassination by law enforcement.

Back In 1971, UCLA students produced their own documentary, REQUIEM 29, which focuses more on the media and law enforcement’s distortion of the incidents at the Moratorium march, rather than on the “cult” of Ruben Salazar.  The film has not been released for more than 40 years, except as excerpts in other documentaries or in rare VHS copies.

In the wake of the police violence and the distortion of the truth by law enforcement and the media in the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases, perhaps now is the time for the public to rediscover the truth of the complicit nature between the media and law enforcement that young people were already aware of over 40 years ago.

Those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it….

New collab by @faith47 and @imraanchristian in South Africa, breathtaking! “Its starting point is a poignant image taken by Imraan during the 2015 student protests in Cape Town.
The photograph documents a pivotal turning point - the moment when peaceful protestors reacted violently as a response to sustained police brutality.
It poses the question of how we as individual South Africans, as well as the media, become complicit in a culture of consuming violence - where it is normalised, without real investigation into the systemic causes.
By deconstructing the image, the piece observes how specific events become part of the fabric of both personal and collective memory, and become transformed and fragmented over time.
The artwork intends to provoke and bring visibility to much needed transformation within the historical and institutional structures of South Africa.” #streetart #mural #photography #art #fragmented #deconstructed #faith47 #imraanchristian #southafrica

“Looting and Rioting”

First, people need to understand something about the “riots” in Ferguson: I get the feeling that a lot of White people are somehow thinking “Wow, those Black people just stood up in their living rooms and basically set fires to their own residences”

Not the way it works…

You know what neighborhood businesses typically get burned? The ones that aren’t Black owned. You’ve seen them — the pawn shops, the quick-marts, the pay-day loan stores, the liquor stores, the third tier rent-to-own stores…you know, the kind of stores you rarely see on every other corner in middle class White neighborhoods. In short, all the businesses endemic of profiteering and structural poverty…the same businesses that like to follow innocent Black people around in stores for no reason. The businesses that won’t hire many of the Black people living in the neighborhoods they’re profiting off of. The businesses that charge twice as much for the same goods & services that are half as expensive in White neighborhoods

THOSE are the businesses that typically get burned in impoverished neighborhoods. Now, while I’m not necessarily advocating riots, I will repeat the words of Martin Luther King Jr, I think that we’ve got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard

Second, Other than corporate media outlets repeating what the police are telling them, I haven’t seen much hard evidence of honest to God unprovoked “rioting”…but what I have seen is lots of white police firing tear gas and rubber bullets at peaceful protesters. I’ve seen militarized police aim guns, tanks and sound cannons at unarmed civilians in their own neighborhoods. I’ve seen police not interviewing, but arresting key witnesses. I’ve seen people getting gassed in their homes—THEIR HOMES—for committing the crime of what, being Black at home?

The media goes on and on about “looting and rioting” without focusing too much on the police’s strong-arm tactics, they’re complicit in furthering the ratings meme of “unreasonably angry Black people” 

False media narratives: do the words match the facts?

When corporate media and Fox News saturate the airwaves year after year, constantly calling innocent black people “thugs” - even unarmed black murder victims - and when angry white politicians (ie. Republicans) simultaneously and repeatedly say things like, “We need to take ‘our’ country back!”…..why is anyone at all surprised when white supremacists violently act out on those anti-government and inherently racist messages of anti-blackness? 

(related posts »here and here)

Two Americas

American cops: yes he killed some folks but he’s white and as an officer of the law I had to bring him in alive so he could face a jury of his peers

American courts: that’s understandable and sounds perfectly reasonable. it’s the AMERICAN way

American media: the killer is a troubled soul who also likes puppies ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

American cops: they were black and completely unarmed so I got scared and immediately shot them to death

American courts: that’s understandable and sounds perfectly reasonable. it’s the american way

American media: the victim was a thug who once smoked a joint and a few years ago they paid their cell phone bill 2 days late  (ಠ_ಠ)


The ‘Crimewave’ That Wasn’t

Hm…if I reflected on this data critically and compared it to recent news reports about how the police are now in more danger than ever, I might conclude that it almost seems like the police and corporate media are conspiring to push a false, misleading “runaway crime wave” narrative in order to justify out of control police brutality.

#StayWoke: the police are brutal and the media is complicit.

anonymous asked:

Ohhhh Harry's gearing up, somebody done pissed him off 😈👀👀

Yeah, I do think he was pissed. He seems to really not like it when the fans get caught in the crossfire of 1D’s fuckery. That may be what this was about. Remember how angry RBB was with the whole “fans wouldn’t care if the 5th member of 1D was a potato” incident?

I think there’s a history of him being very gracious with and grateful for the fans.

So when shit like this pops off…

…it genuinely pisses him off.

God bless Harry Styles. He’s a good noodle. Some other bloggers made the good point that “beach don’t kill by vibe” could be an indirect to Briohno’s mom, since “beach” is part of her Instagram handle and she certainly is very complicit in this latest shitty narrative. Basically, the media coverage of the past few days has blamed both the fans and Louis for the babygate debacle. How fucking dare they? I’d be angry too. 1DHQ is essentially framing a group of innocent people. Nobody’s hacking these thirsty bottom-feeders (hacking is such a worn out 1DHQ trope too). They can easily end the “harassment” by setting their accounts to private, LEAVING them on private and blocking 1D fans.

Also, 1DHQ’s narratives are so mind-numbingly stupid that it probably only adds to Harry’s anger. They keep throwing these ridiculous narratives and transparent stunts out here and then get pissy when people call them out. But I doubt they’re gonna adjust their tactics. The narrative will continue to be a mess and will continue to take cheap shots at both Louis and the fans. I have a bad feeling it’s gonna get worse before it finally ends. But I would be thrilled if peace loving Harry saw fit to fight back and fight dirty. Lord knows no one would blame him.


Cause and effect doesn’t apply to TV programming, silly forensic psychiatrist…or else why would the media be doing the exact opposite of what you suggest yet again?
Attempted Murder and Torture #NoDAPL

11/2016 8pm Mountain time: Attempted murder and torture: The US government is trying to kill brave water defenders by hypothermia. It is 20 degrees at Cannonball ND where Water Defenders are being soaked with high pressure water cannon. The US govt is responsible for injuries and any deaths that happen. They are not only allowing this, they are facilitating it. Media blackout, empty words and brutal repression are complicit in genocide. Send brave Water Defenders strength of prayer and solidarity. Share and make calls:
National Guard 701.333.2000;
ND Governor’s office 701.328.2200;
Army Corp of Engineers 202.761.8700;
Amnesty International 212.807.8400

Use your technology. Time. Creativity. Networking. Spirit. Intention. Energy. Compassion. We all must stop the atrocity happening here and now. In the world. Government must express OUR collective peaceful, kind, loving, hopeful, dignified will!

Originally posted by the-movemnt

Originally posted by refinery29

It would have taken a three second Google search to confirm that the flag in the cafe window wasn’t the ISIS flag but apparently nobody in the media could be bothered. The whole point of terrorism is to scare people for political purposes and the media is all too complicit in this. Wildly speculating as to who is carrying out a siege, assuming that it’s terrorist at all, reporting with no evidence that it is related to anti-terror raids earlier in the year (which themselves hardly proved anything) only fuels the fire of fear. And the media don’t care, they’re happy to partake in it, they’ll even publish photos and videos of police operations even after the police request not to, because they know it sells in Australia. And racism and islamaphobia will continue to make the front page.